Re: [hugin-ptx] Some of my recent hugin efforts
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:51:06PM -0500, Yuval Levy wrote: > On November 10, 2010 10:19:35 pm Robert Krawitz wrote: > > Hugin kept giving me FOV estimates of between 87 and 95 degrees HFOV > > don't worry, as long as it is < 360° (i.e. fits on the panosphere) for > partial > (non 360° panos) accuracy of estimated HFOV is much less important than the > visual result. To get those estimates accurate you should set the lens at a specific zoom setting. (e.g. at the limit of its range). Next, you take a quick panorama, all the way around. Stitch it, and in the second round, you enable optimization of the FOV. Once your panorama looks reasonable, the optimized FOV will be exactly right. Instead of relying on exif info, you can now copy over that FOV value exactly. (or you can calculate a "zoom factor"). Roger. -- ** r.e.wo...@bitwizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2600998 ** **Delftechpark 26 2628 XH Delft, The Netherlands. KVK: 27239233** *-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --* Q: It doesn't work. A: Look buddy, doesn't work is an ambiguous statement. Does it sit on the couch all day? Is it unemployed? Please be specific! Define 'it' and what it isn't doing. - Adapted from lxrbot FAQ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Some of my recent hugin efforts
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:51:06 -0500, Yuval Levy wrote: > > On November 10, 2010 10:19:35 pm Robert Krawitz wrote: >> One more panorama from the trip last month: >> http://rlk.smugmug.com/Other/Landscapes/4851912_oeCNm#1086043156_p4b23 > > nice work, thanks for sharing. Thanks. >> Hugin kept giving me FOV estimates of between 87 and 95 degrees HFOV > > don't worry, as long as it is < 360° (i.e. fits on the panosphere) > for partial (non 360° panos) accuracy of estimated HFOV is much less > important than the visual result. That's good to know (this is referring to the lens HFOV -- the overall pano HFOV was getting estimated anywhere between 270 and 355 degrees). >> The amount of error was truly extreme -- the worst CP was about 85 >> units off and the average was 8 units. However, there were only a >> couple of bad seams when I actually stitched it together, and they >> were all in locations that were fairly easy to fix. Interestingly, >> when I added more CPs, the worst error went down to 70, but there >> were more seams. I guess the thing to worry about is what happens >> when it's stitched, not what the optimization results are (Yuv, I >> guess that's what you were telling me :-) ). > > yep, you guess right! in this particular case, parallax affects the > lower 1/3 of the image more than the top 2/3. If I was to add CPs > manually, I would only put them on the far away mountains and maybe > on the far away trees. The CP generator does not know this. It > does not have a sense for depth, and it does not know that CPs at > infinity suffer much less from parallax than CPs in proximity of the > camera's viewpoint. Interesting. When I added more CPs to get a broader distribution, I got lower error numbers and narrower seam errors but more seams -- and in more difficult locations. I particularly tried to add CPs far away, but they didn't help. I got the best results by simply killing the obvious bad CPs and relying on the auto points. > points in the lower 1/3 will have higher error. the > cleaning/pruning function of CPs in Hugin may or may not catch them > - depending on where the majority of the points are found. running > it multiple times (i.e. clicking the button multiple times) may help > or may make things worse. > > the random/regular pattern on the surface of the rock makes it very > easy to deal with bad seams in your favorite image editor. Yup. The harder part was where the seams crossed the cracks in the rock. I can't even tell where the seams are on the surface of the rock. If the bad seams crossed through trees it would have been much harder. Fortunately I didn't wind up with a seam crossing my shadow. This is all definitely a lot of fun. I probably won't be doing a lot more panos this year -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Some of my recent hugin efforts
On November 10, 2010 10:19:35 pm Robert Krawitz wrote: > One more panorama from the trip last month: > http://rlk.smugmug.com/Other/Landscapes/4851912_oeCNm#1086043156_p4b23 nice work, thanks for sharing. > Hugin kept giving me FOV estimates of between 87 and 95 degrees HFOV don't worry, as long as it is < 360° (i.e. fits on the panosphere) for partial (non 360° panos) accuracy of estimated HFOV is much less important than the visual result. > The amount of error was truly extreme -- the worst CP was about 85 > units off and the average was 8 units. However, there were only a > couple of bad seams when I actually stitched it together, and they > were all in locations that were fairly easy to fix. Interestingly, > when I added more CPs, the worst error went down to 70, but there were > more seams. I guess the thing to worry about is what happens when > it's stitched, not what the optimization results are (Yuv, I guess > that's what you were telling me :-) ). yep, you guess right! in this particular case, parallax affects the lower 1/3 of the image more than the top 2/3. If I was to add CPs manually, I would only put them on the far away mountains and maybe on the far away trees. The CP generator does not know this. It does not have a sense for depth, and it does not know that CPs at infinity suffer much less from parallax than CPs in proximity of the camera's viewpoint. points in the lower 1/3 will have higher error. the cleaning/pruning function of CPs in Hugin may or may not catch them - depending on where the majority of the points are found. running it multiple times (i.e. clicking the button multiple times) may help or may make things worse. the random/regular pattern on the surface of the rock makes it very easy to deal with bad seams in your favorite image editor. Yuv signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [hugin-ptx] Some of my recent hugin efforts
One more panorama from the trip last month: http://rlk.smugmug.com/Other/Landscapes/4851912_oeCNm#1086043156_p4b23 This one was tricky, since it was hand-held, with a lot of very close detail, and with the 8-16 at the wide end. This is equivalent to about 110 degrees HFOV (on a 1.6 crop sensor), but Hugin kept giving me FOV estimates of between 87 and 95 degrees HFOV when I optimized it for view. I don't quite understand what that's all about. I'm not sure how wide this really was; Hugin gave me estimates anywhere between 270 and 355 degrees (I suspect it's about 300 degrees wide, actually). The amount of error was truly extreme -- the worst CP was about 85 units off and the average was 8 units. However, there were only a couple of bad seams when I actually stitched it together, and they were all in locations that were fairly easy to fix. Interestingly, when I added more CPs, the worst error went down to 70, but there were more seams. I guess the thing to worry about is what happens when it's stitched, not what the optimization results are (Yuv, I guess that's what you were telling me :-) ). I had to synthesize a fair bit of rock in the lower corners (including some of the shadow cast by the dog), and some sky in the upper corners, but that was mostly just texture. Then, as usual, I boosted the sky some and the ground not so much (just enough to get a bit of pop). I think that's about it for panorama sequences from that trip, alas. Not a bad haul, though. -- Robert Krawitz Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2 Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- http://ProgFree.org Project lead for Gutenprint --http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works." --Eric Crampton -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Some of my recent hugin efforts
On November 6, 2010 01:36:57 am Robert Krawitz wrote: > Comments welcome. thank you for sharing. good to see that the effort was worth it. some of them are a bit oversaturated for my taste, but that's purely subjective. I hope to see you regularly here. Yuv signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
